Wednesday, May 28, 2014

I exposed Dave´s shameful behavior in an article posted on April 21, 2014, called Steel-Wool Iron Spheres Debunked Again: Shame on NMSR´s Dave Thomas. The article debunks Dave´s claim of getting "iron spheres" via burned steel-wool, since the alleged iron spheres are neither iron nor spheres. It also uncovers the fact that Dave continued to advertize iron, even though his buddy Oystein had called him out on the JREF forum for making "a false statement" regarding iron...Oystein had noticed that Dave´s EDS readings actually showed iron-oxide.

Dave´s ranting response on his NMSR webpage is one for the records: Dave is telling his followers that I am lying when I say he did not retract the false statement, because he did respond to Oystein by editing the length of the video - and my original article (now updated) did not mention the editing. The editing did not matter, however, because it did NOT actually retract the false claim - instead Dave simply removed the EDS section that exposed the false claim!

Dave also implies I am lying because he may have removed other false claims besides those addressed in my April 21 article, but that is irrelevant even if true. This gives you a very good insight into the mentality of one Dave Thomas, who continues to advertize the video with the same old false statements about "iron" and "spheres" on his webpage - Dave Thomas on May 28, 2014:

"...watch the video on NMSR's YouTube channel,
'theNMSR', in which a BIC lighter is used to burn steel wool, creating numerous iron microspheres without any Thermite
at all!" http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr911.htm

The following clip about the 'crash' of Flight 800, in 1996, is an example of the authorities (FBI-NTSB) trying to push a completely false account of what happened - despite numerous eyewitnesses and physical evidence that utterly refutes their version of events.

The relevant part starts at 18:30 and continues until about 25:40.

The person who made this clip, who is obviously well read when it comes to the official story, is either too naïve to understand what happened, or is a paid propagandist trying to put out material in light of a recent documentary on this disaster - in which ex-NTSB officials admit that the FBI, and their own bosses, organised a cover-up to hide evidence that the aircraft had been struck by surface to air missile(s).

According to the now retired officials, the aircraft was lost due to an external initiating event, not a centre fuel tank explosion. The clip above twists the witness statements saying they only looked in the direction of the aircraft after there was an explosion. Actual interviews with many witnesses show that they observed the missile-like object(s) first before seeing the aircraft explode. The FBI changed the witness statements or mischaracterised them. There were protests about this during the investigation.

The most glaring error in the featured clip is the recreation of the 747 climbing after its nose section allegedly fell off because 'it was now lighter and the engines were on full throttle'. This fiction was made up by the cover-up artists to try and explain away the eyewitnesses to the missile(s). The propagandists 'explained' that the witnesses simply saw burning fuel or contrails after hearing the explosion. According to them, the burning fuel came out as the aircraft climbed which 'accounted' for the 'flare-like light rising from the ocean' described by many witnesses. The FBI-NTSB even got the CIA (no kidding) to make a cartoon film (recreation) showing the 747 climbing without its heavy nose section.

The problem is that when a 333 ton aircraft loses 50+ tons of weight - all of it forward the wings - the centre of gravity (the balance of the aircraft) immediately shifts towards the tail. When this happens the aircraft is no longer balanced on its wings, which it needs to do to maintain lift. The plane basically flips backwards and then goes down (it stalls) - the same as if you had a model glider and then cut a large chunk of the nose off and then threw it. The centre of gravity on an aircraft is vital.

What is being dramatically presented here is literally impossible. If you know anything about aircraft design and construction then this part of the story is obviously rubbish.

One thing that is important to the case, as revealed in the clip, is the fact that Flight 800 passed through, or near, a US Navy missile testing area.

(Note: I ran into the propaganda clip the other day and it bugged me because many people will end up believing it. The dramatization will 'convince' a majority of viewers since most people have little understanding when it comes to the basic principles of flight. Below I've added the best documentary on the incident that came out in the year 2000. The recent doco on the same event came out late last year, or early this year - which featured ex-NTSB officials confirming what was reported in the 2000 doco.)

Monday, May 26, 2014

A little something I wrote a few years back at care2.com that's still relevant for this Memorial
Day.

Jul 11, 2007

As the health care debate in America continues, so does the suffering of Vietnam veterans and citizens due to the toxic defoliant Agent Orange
used in the war. The substance has been linked to everything from
cancer, to birth defects of children whos parents were exposed. Gary D.
Moore, SSgt USAF 1968-1972 has compiled an alphabetical index of
the many diseases related to the effects of herbicide exposure, as well
as medical and scientific terms used when reading about it.

Despite
what any of us think about the wars our soldiers fight in, I think we
can all agree our vets deserve nothing but the best health care
available. Especially when one considers that many of their medical woes
come as a direct result of their own Governments actions.

"At the time Agent Orange was sold to the U.S. government for use in Vietnam, internal memos of its manufacturers reveal it was known that a dioxin, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin (TCDD), is produced as a byproduct of the manufacture of 2,4,5-T, and was thus present in any of the herbicides that used it."

In other words they knew the risks! In 1984 a $180 million settlement resulted in one time lump
sums of $1,200 being paid out to affected veterans. I am sure many
affected veterans never saw a dime of this money. For the ones that did,
I am sure that $1,200 did not go far!

It is also of interest to note that a April 17, 2003 study found that Agent Orange Use Was Underestimated. It has also been exposed that the American army tested Agent Orange in Canada.My
friend Karen Stillwell has been fighting an uphill battle with the
Department of Veterans Affairs. She has recently written the agency a
letter detailing her struggles and pleading for help. Here is the intro
to that letter...

"I am writing with regards to my husband, James
Maurice Stillwell. Honorably discharged from the Army, on January 15
th, 1971, who applied for benefits
through the local veterans administration, back in the first part of
February 2007. James was diagnosed with agent orange in his lungs, only
half of his liver is working, and getting worse daily. His spleen is
enlarged, the gallbladder
has already been taken and his digestive track and large and small
intestines are rotting away, again, due to agent orange, environmental
issues, and herbicides via the police action in Viet Nam. He is going on
the list for a liver transplant if the next medicine he starts taking
doesn't work. That will be probably after the month of July. He has to
see the doctors again in Nashville ,TN. at the Veterans Hospital in a
couple of weeks for another appointment. We have not heard from nor have we seen any type of benefits as of this date, July 11 th/2007."

Their struggle detailed in the letter is amazing. At every corner they have been met with apathy
and contempt. The sad thing about it is similar struggles have been
taking place for decades now. Vets have been fighting for what is owed
them to no avail.

Even more shocking is the fact that things of this nature still continue with our Military today.

"What
you don't know about your government could kill you... Department of
Defense documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act
expose the horrific underworld of the disposable army mentality and the
government funded experimentation upon US citizens conducted without
their knowledge or consent"

So it's a new war and basically the same old crap! Watch the trailer HERE.We
have to fight for justice for the veterans and citizens of Vietnam
while remembering that history is repeating itself as we speak. The
following links are some activist websites and petitions to get you
started.

Saturday, May 24, 2014

The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them. The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.

Sounds fairly reasonable and not at all insidious, right? They're just wanting to clarify standards that kids need to meet in order to be successful...right? They're from the government, and they're here to help. Run...quickly.

I've done research into Common Core, and I have spoken with a family member who is an educator in Florida. Common Core does nothing it promises. It is confusing, frustrating, and convoluted. Simple math becomes conceptual. Teachers are reading from scripts and are being forced to teach this garbage.

Education should teach children to think, to analyze, to be creative, to question. Common Core destroys the notion that thinking is important. To me, it seems that this is the new way to control and indoctrinate the youth of America. Control the education, control the population. Common Core is the next step in the decline of the American intellect. "No Child Left Behind" was supposed to be the magic cure for our American education ills, but where did that leave us? Narrow curriculum, teachers being forced to spend more time preparing their students for testing rather than learning, cheating scandals, and the list goes on.

And you may ask yourself why would "they" want to dumb down our kids and discourage critical thinking? The answer is that if our children critically think, question, observe, and analyze, then they don't make for good sheep. If we program kids to just follow the rules, stay in line, eat their Michelle Obama-approved lunches, and be good little drones then they will grow up to be willing workers for the government machine. Happily, blissfully pay their taxes and abide by ludicrous laws and regulations. They won't know the freedoms they lost. Compliant, boring cogs.

How do we fight this? How can we stop Common Core? The truth is, you can't. But you can educate yourself. You can refuse to have the wool pulled over your eyes. If you are a parent, you can see to it your children have a broad curriculum at home. Teach them to love books, art, music, history, and to ask questions. Take them out in nature, to museums, to real places that encourage wonder. Be an active part of your child's education and don't leave it up to the "experts." Keep the creativity and knowledge alive.

Want to know more about Common Core? Here are some links to get you started:

NEW YORK CITY, May 16, 2004 – The Kean Commission was called to life
in Nov. 2002, when the White House dropped its objections to an
independent 9/11 investigation, after many months of persistent lobbying
by September 11th families. At the time, this was seen as a victory for
the relatives of those killed on September 11th, and for their allies
in the fight for open government and accountability. As the Kean
Commission nears the end of its work, it is informative to ask what
those families are saying today.

23 Questions to Bush

“Mr. Bush, who approved the flight of the bin Laden family out of the United States, when all commercial flights were grounded?“

That
is one of 23 explosive questions that George W. Bush and his
subordinates must face in public testimony, under oath and pain of
perjury–that is, if leaders of September 11 family groups get their way.

The question refers to private flights
for Saudi royalty, cleared by the White House during the otherwise
total civilian flight ban in the days immediately after September 11.
Members of the Bin Laden clan, including two of Osama Bin Laden’s many
brothers, were allowed to leave the United

States before federal
investigators had a chance to question them.1
Despite confirmed reports dating back to September 2001, the story of
the Bin Laden family airlift was denigrated as urban legend until
April, when former White House terror adviser Richard Clarke and
Secretary of State Colin Powell both confirmed it.

How many other confirmations of “urban legend” are still in store?

Accountability and the Theory of Luck

“Why has no one in any level of our government been held accountable for the countless failures leading up to and on 9/11?”

The twenty-three questions are from the Family Steering Committee,
twelve September 11 relatives who represent many other 9/11 family
groups. Since November 2002, they have monitored the 9/11 Commission
headed by former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean.

“To me
luck is something that happens once. When you have this repeated pattern
of broken protocols, broken laws, broken communication, one cannot
still call it luck.” - Mindy Kleinberg

Members of the FSC were key lobbyists in gaining an independent
investigation of September 11. Mindy Kleinberg, known as one of the four
“Jersey Wives,” testified to the Kean Commission during its first
public proceedings in early 2003. She alerted the panel to disturbing
gaps and contradictions in the government’s story of what happened on
September 11.

Her comments challenged the idea that all anomalies in the
official story are due to incompetence or coincidence. She called that
“the theory of luck.”
“Is it luck that aberrant stock trades
were not monitored?” Kleinberg asked. She was referring to the
widespread reports of possible insider trading in the week before
September 11 indicating specific prior knowledge of the attacks. 2

Kleinberg: “Is it luck when 15 visas are awarded based on incomplete forms? Is it luck when Airline Security screenings allow hijackers to board planes with box cutters and pepper spray?
Is it luck when Emergency FAA and NORAD protocols are not followed? Is
it luck when a national emergency is not reported to top government
officials on a timely basis?

“To me luck is something that happens once. When you have this
repeated pattern of broken protocols, broken laws, broken communication,
one cannot still call it luck. If at some point we don’t look to hold
the individuals accountable for not doing their jobs properly then how
can we ever expect for terrorists not to get lucky again?”

A Lesson in Reading

The families threw down their challenge to Bush last February,
following reports that the Kean Commission had asked Bush and Bill
Clinton to testify. Only in May did Bush finally appear before the
panel, in a closed session at the Oval Office. No transcript was taken.
Bush assented to the hearing on the condition that he testify together
with Dick Cheney, who apparently did most of the talking. Based on the
handful of public statements about their joint appearance, it seems
doubtful that the panel confronted Bush with this question:

“Please explain why you remained at the Sarasota,
Florida, Elementary School for a press conference after you had finished
listening to the children read, when as a terrorist target, your
presence potentially jeopardized the lives of the children?”

The
family leaders have released a series of strongly worded statements
blasting the Bush administration for stonewalling the 9/11
investigation. But they have been equally harsh in chastising the Kean
Commission for its refusal to examine key evidence.

Bush, his staff and his Secret Service entourage did indeed pay a
visit to the Booker Elementary School, as carried on live television
until 9:34 a.m. This was fifty minutes after the first plane hit the
World Trade Center and 29 minutes after 9:05, when Bush was informed of
the second plane crash and told, “America is under attack.” After the
well-known moment, when his chief of staff whispered into his ear, Bush
continued listening to the children read. He remained in the classroom
for about 13 minutes. He then prepared and delivered a brief speech to
the nation from the school, calling for a moment of silence for the WTC
victims at 9:31.

The Pentagon was hit at 9:38.

The White House has never explained this anomaly. Instead, Bush has
twice claimed, in speeches made available on the White House website,
that he thought the first plane crash (at 8:46 a.m.) was an accident. On
hearing news of the crash at 8:55, he says he thought, “That’s one
lousy pilot.” Yet the Federal Aviation Administration was aware, since
8:20 at the latest, that American Airlines Flight 11 had been hijacked.
The North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) was also informed of the
hijacking.

And by 8:55 a.m. or shortly after, two additional hijackings were
known to be in progress. In the White House, Dick Cheney is known to
have by then been on an open line connecting FAA, NORAD and the Secret
Service. Yet as the attacks went on, the reaction times of U.S. air
defense apparently became worse.

Was no one telling the president all this? Who was acting as
commander-in-chief, while Bush listened to “A Girl and Her Pet Goat”?
Was there no concern that the school itself would be a target, since it
was public knowledge, days in advance, that the president would be
there?

Courage to Ask the Obvious

The family leaders have released a series of strongly worded
statements blasting the Bush administration for stonewalling the 9/11
investigation. But they have been equally harsh in chastising the Kean
Commission for its refusal to examine key evidence. They have called for
the immediate resignation of Philip Zelikow, executive director of the
commission, pointing to his various conflicts of interest. (See The
Rice/Zelikow Connection)

The relatives have shown no reluctance to pursue controversial lines
of inquiry in public. It is hard to imagine the commission asking if the
Bush administration tried to cut a deal with Osama Bin Laden in advance
of the 9/11 attacks, as reported in the European press back in the
autumn of 2001.
But the families want an answer: “Did you or any agent of the
United States government carry out any negotiations or talks with UBL,
an agent of UBL, or al-Qaeda?” (“UBL” is government speak for Osama Bin Laden.)

The Commission has shown no inclination to follow the trail of the
Cheney “energy policy meetings” of early 2001, or the Bush
administration’s oil-pipeline talks with the Taliban up to July 2001.
These touchy subjects might arise if they ever considered this question:

“During that same period, did you or any agent of the
United States government carry out any negotiations or talks with any
foreign government, its agents, or officials regarding UBL?”

Would the Kean Commission ever wonder out loud if anyone other than
Al-Qaeda (or other foreigners) gained anything from the attacks? The
families are not afraid to confront this obvious concern:

“Which individuals, governments, agencies, institutions, or groups may have benefited from the attacks of 9/11?”

Although the Kean Commission accepted a deal strictly limiting its
access to White House documents concerning advance warnings of a
possible terror attack, Kean claimed repeatedly that there is “no
smoking gun” to indicate Bush had specific prior knowledge of the
attacks. At least, not in the “parts of the documents” Kean has actually
been allowed to see.

The families don’t buy that on faith, or on partial evidence. They want specifics:

“As Commander-in-Chief, from May 1, 2001 until
September 11, 2001, did you receive any information from any
intelligence agency official or agent that UBL was planning to attack
this nation on its own soil using airplanes as weapons, targeting New
York City landmarks during the week of September 11, 2001 or on the
actual day of September 11, 2001?”

Carefully researched, the families’ questions reflect concerns that
have caused millions to doubt the official story–and to call for a truly
independent investigation: One with subpeona power, testimony under
oath, no self-imposed restrictions on allowable lines of inquiry, and a
published, uncensored final report.

“Even now we are dealing with the idea of how the [commission] report
is going to be, when it’s released,” says Beverly Eckert of the FSC.
“The classification process is done by the White House and the
intelligence agencies. They are the ones. They are a subject of this
report. How can they not have a conflict in classifying and editing it?
They can edit at will.”

Conspiracy Theory?

It is hard to dismiss these concerns as “conspiracy theory” when many
Bush administration officials used the most outrageous conspiracy
theory of all–the legend that Saddam backed the 9/11 attacks–as pretext
for invading Iraq. In that matter as well, the families want government
held accountable:

“Do you continue to maintain that Saddam Hussein was
linked to al-Qaeda? What proof do you have of any connection between al-
Qaeda and the Hussein regime?”

9/11 was
used as a lever to shift the globe. All Americans–and, given the global
impact, the people of the world–need to learn the answers that the
families demand.

Bush in the meantime has admitted there was no such connection. But Cheney and members of his circle still say there was.

The FSC questions show that, though their grief and tragedy is great,
the families have understood the stakes in the 9/11 disclosure issue
are even greater. Getting the truth of 9/11 means more than justice for
the victims and well-deserved closure for their relatives.

9/11 was used as a lever to shift the globe. All Americans, and,
given the global impact, the people of the world, need to learn the
answers that the families demand. – Nicholas Levis

The Sept. 11 family statements, and their lists of questions to a variety of administration members, have been published on the FSC’s website.

1.
Shafig bin Laden, Osama’s older brother, had been in Washington on the
morning of September 11 for the annual meeting of the Carlyle Group, the
fund that until that October tied Bush family interests to the Bin
Laden family fortune.

2. In the days before 9/11, unknown traders bought unusually high
“put options” in the stock of United Airlines, American Airlines, and
the WTC tenants and reinsurers. This meant that the traders expected the
prices of these equities to plunge in the short term. The volumes of
the purchases may have activated a known CIA real-time tracing program
designed to discover suspicious trades (PROMIS). The FBI later claimed
it had determined the identities of the traders in the U.S., but says
they are in the clear and declines to name them. Many of the known
trades were transacted through A.B. Brown. The chairman of that bank,
Mayo Shattuck, resigned suddenly on September 12. In the case of one
trade, the buyer left $2.5 million uncollected for months after the
attacks. Financial authorities in Frankfurt and Tokyo and an
intelligence bureau in Israel also reported suspicious trades and
initially characterized these as smoking guns that would lead back to
the masterminds of 9/11. To our knowledge there has been no public
follow-up to these statements since. In London, authorities said they
traced the trades back to an unnamed “small airline” that was pursuing a
“hedging strategy” (IHT, 9/20/01).

"The whole thing is beyond shameful. The truth of what happened on 911
cannot be hidden from all, forever. Architects & Engineers for 911
Truth (of which over 2100 have now signed a petition calling for an
actual investigation*, will be out there presenting facts (evidence of
demolition) ignored by the mass media and the official accounts, but
well-documented, -and so not going anywhere. *An actual investigation
would be by a regulatory agency that considers all of the evidence and
tests for explosives. Not the farces we have seen from FEMA, the 911
Comm. -which dint even mention Building 7, and NIST, which didn't
address the actual destruction of the Towers and took 7 years to tell us
WTC 7 imploded (the perimeter at actual free fall for the first 108
feet!) fell from "normal office fires" and 'not from explosives' -even
though they never tested for explosives. Beyond absurd and shameful.
Just like the anthrax from a week later, a nano engineered thermitic
explosive has been found in every sample of dust a group of scientists
tested, -is very hightech stuff that has been traced back to US military
labs. The peer-reviewed paper, (Harrit 2009) remains unchallenged. In
fact numerous studies have been done showing mutually supportive
results. They can be found at the Journal for 911 Studies."

Thursday, May 22, 2014

Corruption everywhere...at least it seems so.
Clearly corruption played a huge part in 9/11..The dedicated to truth writers on this blog have spent untold hrs. researching the facts,the numbers, an given much of their time to get the information re: 9/11 truth out there.

Every time I hear the president or some known liar to get in office politician speak regarding 9/11.. well to be frank I get enraged.
After all this time and after all these facts regarding explosive materials, countless hrs. of vid material...family members saying they do not believe the official reports, architects, pilots fireman, an other governments...like Japan saying the official report is bogus.... What we have is no new investigation.
What we have parading as a truth within our culture is one of the most egregious boldface lie ever told in modern history.
The only way that we could have this is through pure corruption.

Most people know by now that they were lied to regarding 9/11.
I walk and talk about it round my neck of the woods..an people shake their heads yes when I say 9/11 was an inside job...they agree. Ask anyone.... do politicians lie ? ....and people will answer you with something like this...only when their lips are moving...but somehow there is still no new investigation....People want to argue over stuff like...no planes,,space beams,,,pancake collapse...an whatever else they believe took those towers down...I just want to say this...It doesn't matter who is right about what did the deed re: how those towers fell. To me what matters is this..that official story is a lie..period...that's it..its a lie..so can we unify on that...all else is irrelevant in my way of looking at the world.

Some very corrupt people in office then and now continue to tell the same lie when it comes to 9/11. The corruption runs deep or we would have heard the truth from our government way before now.
My heartfelt thanks to the tireless efforts of the writers on this blog an their dedication to one thing..the truth...thank you guys...you're awesome.

I started to become very interested in in social-justice issues in 2000 when exposed to the Nader/LaDuke Green Party presidential campaign, then went on to get a Bachelor's degree in Political Science (minor in Peace Studies). While at UNM I wrote a political op-ed column for the university paper, and have since continued to write on similar issues, though now with a more radical/accurate perspective than I had then.
If you appreciate the perspective and information shared here and would like to see more, please help me have the resources/time needed here: https://www.patreon.com/colindonoghue

Paolo Attivissimo,
a blogger and anchorman on Italian Swiss Radio, published an interview
in February 2014 with Auckland New Zealand professor of civil
engineering Charles Clifton on his blog Undicisettembre
(Italian for "September 11"). The content of the blog indeed seems
limited to the events of September 11, and Attivissimo states its goal
is "conspiracy theory debunking."

In his introduction to the interview, Attivissimo remarks, "Clifton's
professional opinion dispels all of the doubts raised by conspiracy
theorists regarding the three collapses and makes it very clear that for
the experts there is no mystery at all."

Inasmuch as the paper appeared in the journal HERA, Innovations in Metals
before the dust had completely settled on Ground Zero, it would be
interesting to see how Mr. Clifton acquired enough technical information
to elaborate on the scientific aspects of the WTC collapse so quickly
and to have his conclusions published in a journal printed for release
in December 2001. The timing would mean that he completed
his investigation within just weeks of the catastrophic events. It has
taken other experts years of painstaking investigation to develop their
conclusions, so it would be intriguing to find out from him how he
arrived at his own so quickly. Perhaps Mr. Clifton would agree to be
interviewed by AE911Truth so that he can answer questions related to
this as well as to his other statements in this interview.

The following are excerpts from the interview with our rebuttal in italics:

Charles Clifton: What happened with the World Trade
Center 1 is ... the plane destroyed a large chunk of the core
immediately at impact and severely weakened the rest of it.

This is incorrect. Since the rest of his theory is built on this
fallacy, the theory as a whole is invalid. Although many of the core
columns were damaged, the rest were NOT weakened. Five core columns only
had light damage and 27 had no damage at all.

Undicisettembre: What do you think about conspiracy theories according to which the upper block could not have enough momentum to make the whole building collapse?

The question uses misleading rhetoric ('conspiracy theories') to
discourage rational consideration of theories other than the official
one. A conspiracy is an illegal or subversive act planned by two or more
people. That has nothing to do with the laws of physics, which is what
the question is about. "Bin Laden's 19 hijackers brought down the towers
with jetliners" is a conspiracy theory, but "The World Trade Center
Towers and building 7 collapsed in the manner of controlled demolitions"
is a collapse theory, not a conspiracy theory.

Charles Clifton: From a momentum point of view, if
one floor collapses on another in a building, the force that that floor
invokes on the floor below is slightly greater than what the floor below
is designed to withstand.

No one has shown that scenario to be valid. Northwestern
University's Professor Zdeněk Bažant's analysis necessitates 12 feet of
free fall, but that requires explosives to remove all the supporting
structure simultaneously. Otherwise, the columns that were not severed
would have resisted the downward movement of the upper section and
prevented free fall.

Charles Clifton: The first loud bang could have been the top giving way.

A collapse due to column failure would provide a very different
audio signature – perhaps a loud "creaking" or "groaning" series of
noises, not a huge explosion that was heard and felt by first responders
and reporters. An explosion is a much more likely explanation for the
first loud bang.
Excellent explosion witness video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUXGhLrDqb0
For the blast in question, start at:

1:43 "We heard a very loud blast explosion. We looked up and the building literally began to collapse before us.

1:52 "We heard a loud explosion and at that point the building collapsed"

1:56 "At that point we heard a "boom". I looked up and just saw the building coming at us."

2:03 Reporter "Do you know if it was an explosion or if it was a building collapse?

Officer "To me it sounded like an explosion."

2:11 "There was another major explosion, the building itself, literally the top of it, came down."

2:17 "All of a sudden you hear an explosion, and you could see the building starting to collapse."

Charles Clifton: There were reports of molten steel,
but in fact it would have been either molten aluminum, which [melts at]
660 degrees centigrade, or potentially lead from storage batteries, but
not steel.

Incorrect: Molten aluminum and lead are silver/gray in daylight
conditions. NIST admitted that aluminum glows silvery in daylight, but
then speculated that aluminum mixed with organic material would have
caused it to glow orange. NIST's speculation has been disproven by subsequent experiments.
Even had NIST been correct, the hottest portion of the flow of molten
metal was not merely orange but yellow-white – indicating temperatures
hot enough to melt steel or iron. The RJ Lee Group stated that iron
melted during the event, producing spherical metallic particles. They
also stated that lead vaporized during the collapse. Both of these prove
temperatures far in excess of what jet fuel or office fires can attain.

There is no evidence to support that claim:
Per NIST: "The microstructures of the steels known to have been
exposed to fire, based on the pre-collapse photographic evidence ... show no evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600° C for any significant time." NCSTAR 1-3C p. 281
Per NIST: "From the limited number of recovered structural
elements, no conclusive evidence was found to indicate that pre-collapse
fires were severe enough to have a significant effect on the
microstructure that would have resulted in weakening of the steel
structure." NCSTAR 1-3C p. 235

Charles Clifton: All I am certain of there is that [the molten metal] wasn't steel.Clifton gives no evidence to support his certainty. On the
contrary, his sweeping denial contradicts established and overwhelming
evidence, including the forensic analysis by four independent entities
and numerous eyewitnesses of molten metal.

From FEMA BPAT Report, May 2002, Appendix CCharles Clifton: The initial impact [at the South
Tower] had destroyed in the south east corner, and along the east side,
some six levels of floors. ... Finally, the perimeter frame along the
eastern side failed in an elastic buckling mode over some six stories.This is incorrect, and again, since the rest of
his theory of the South Tower collapse is built on this fallacy, the
theory is invalid. Per NIST: "Floors 80 and 81 were damaged by the
fuselage between the outside wall and the core. The east floor area
between the core and exterior wall was undamaged." NCSTAR 1-2 p. 230.

Charles Clifton: There was another characteristic of
the building that made it vulnerable; if you look at the building, you
see that that dense network of columns didn't extend around the corners;
the corners actually had quite large windows.

Incorrect: The Trade Towers did NOT have windows on the corners.
The spandrel panels continued through the 45-degree-chamfered corners.

Charles Clifton: This meant that the east frame was
not tied back to the north or south frames at the corners, making it
vulnerable to collapse when the floors were destroyed by the impact at
the south end of this frame, and the floor-to-frame system degraded by
fire at the north end. The loss of lateral support from the floors
initiated the buckling collapse.

The East side was clearly tied to the North and South sides via the continuous spandrel panels:

Undicisettembre: What do you think of conspiracy
theories which claim that once the upper block started tipping over it
should have kept rotating, and [that the fact that it didn't] proves
that the towers were intentionally demolished with explosives?

Charles Clifton: That's physically impossible
because of the very limited strength of the floor to frame and floor to
core connections. To rotate as a rigid body, floors had to remain
rigidly attached to the frame and to the core, and there's no way that
that could happen. Those connections were never designed to handle
anything like that; as soon as the top started to rotate, the floors
were torn straight out.

The top 29 floors were falling to one side, not rotating as the
question suggests. According to Newton's first law, an object in motion
will stay in motion unless acted upon by an unbalanced external force.
The top part of the South Tower would have fallen to one side and off.
The South Tower would not have collapsed exactly as the North Tower did,
with the top part falling almost straight down. In any event, the
massive, 29-story upper portion had leaned 22 degrees, yet the structure
below developed complete symmetrical destruction all the way down all
four sides of the building – in less than 12 seconds – at near free-fall
acceleration.

Charles Clifton: So what happened with the
substation in WTC 7 is that after the attacks, it was destroyed, but the
fuel supply system continued to operate and fed fuel into the fires at
substation level. These fires burned for some seven or eight hours and
would have progressively weakened at least some of the transfer members.

Incorrect: NIST gave up the diesel fuel fire hypothesis in December of 2007.

Per NIST: "The working hypothesis is based on an initial local
failure caused by normal building fires, not by fires from leaking
pressurized fuel lines or fuel from day tanks."

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/ncst/upload/WTC7_Approach_Summary_18Dec07-Final.pdfThe only place where a diesel fuel fire could have had an effect
on the collapse was the generator room in the northeast corner of the
5th floor. An independent researcher noted that in a photograph on page
22 of the FEMA report on WTC 7, there was no smoke coming out of the
louvers in the generator room, and that no fire was reported on floor 5
at any time. It was further noted that if the louvers were closed, any
fire would have been starved for oxygen and could not have burned hot
enough to weaken column 79. In their final report, NIST paraphrased
these findings 13 times.

Charles Clifton: So [the girder] was pushed around
on its corbel. Probably, while it was being heated, it would also have
been pushed into the column as it expanded on heating, while at the same
time deflecting downwards, but as the fire started to burn out and cool
down in that region, the now deflected girder would start to cool down
and reduce in length. This would have led to its falling off the corbel
and initiating the collapse.

At 350° C, steel still has about 75% of its room-temperature
strength. It would not have sagged or shortened much at all. A 53½-foot
beam would expand 2.8 inches at 350° C (per the chart below), so the
45-foot girder would have expanded about 2-½ inches. There is about an
inch of space at either end of the girder, so the girder would have
shortened about ½-inch by bowing downward, which is not anywhere near
enough to make it fall off its seat.

AE911Truth's Conclusion: It is apparent, upon review of the numerous
inaccurate observations and dismissal of actual facts on the part of Mr.
Clifton - that a detailed debate between AE911Truth and him, or any of
the dozen or so such licensed engineer supporters of the official
conspiracy theory regarding the evidence of the controlled demolition of
the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11 - would greatly
benefit the engineering community. We hereby offer such an opportunity
to debate competing hypotheses interactively with our
architects/engineers in an open forum beginning, as always, with the
free-falling seven-second destruction of World Trade Center 7.

Make copies of this material (or something similar) and distribute everywhere. This image file is my version of a truth ‘business card’.

These cards were made as simply and cheaply as possible via an online printing company. I basically imported this image to their site, paid via paypal and then a box arrived in the mail.

The cards are highly expendable items. They are designed for either giving to people directly or (my preference) leaving in odd places for people to find.

The image might not look like much but in practice we have found that these cards work very well with their easy-to-see-from-a-distance heading. Their size means that people can easily pocket them. Places where folks can ‘discover’ the cards include car windscreen wipers, on public transport, in bars, in libraries etc. They are not like bumper stickers where you can get in trouble for defacing property.

I already have 5000 cards for less than $200. I had initial runs of 250 cards made at $10 a pop. I intend on getting another 5000 made at least. I will be leaving them all over the city where I live.

I hope that others will copy the idea (or something similar).

Each city need only get together a few groups of people making and distributing the cards for the campaign to be effective. Have fun.

SPOOK

Update:

The following is the multinational online company I used to manufacture the cards. It's called Vista Print and you simply import the image into the box used for making business cards. I recommend doing a test batch with low amounts, selecting the cheapest price first, before going into mass production:

The JREF forum has attempted to discredit the iron-sphere evidence with various forms of misinformation (see examples here, here, here and here), but Rev. Mohr has finally decided that enough is enough. On the 26. of April, 2014, Rev. Mohr stated on the JREF forum:

"...After all,
Rich Lee's report did talk about "iron rich", and one of Millette's
reports showed "high iron content" in the dust. Having talked to
Millette last year about this, he does believe that the iron-rich
spheres are indeed iron-rich and wants to study this further (an
interest he reasserted just a couople weeks ago). I don't think it's a
stretch to accept the iron-richness of the spheres Harrit/Jones report
on, because the EDX spectra show it (like Fig 21). The main question
is, since these have been formed from burning these chips, how do we
explain their presence? Since Ivan and Dave's demonstrations have failed
to impress Ziggi et al, what WOULD impress tham?" http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=9972774&postcount=140

There are some major revelations here: Chris Mohr acknowledges Dr. Harrit´s reported iron-rich spheres and reveals that Dr. Millette agrees that the spheres are in fact rich in iron (not iron-oxides). The significance of the elemental iron in the spheres has eluded the so-called "debunkers" for years, but this is the trademark of the thermite reaction. The DSC ignition of the red/gray chips at 430C starts a reaction that heats the iron-oxide grains beyond the 1400C melting-point, to form the spheres, and more importantly it also reduces the grains to elemental iron at the same time. Specialized high-temperature furnaces can also produce spheres, but these furnaces leave iron-oxides because they rely on conventional combustion.

The biggest break-through is that Rev. Mohr now agrees that "the main question" to address, is to explain the formation of the iron-rich spheres. Chris Mohr does complain that we have not accepted forum chit-chat and dubious YouTube videos as debunking evidence, but the type of evidence needed to make us reconsider our stance has never been a mystery: We need to see a reviewed paper that addresses the iron rich spheres and challenges Dr. Harrit´s conclusion. Harrit´s paper made this clear from day one with a statement on page 28:

"To merit consideration, any assertion that a prosaic substance such as paint could match the characteristics we have described would have to be accompanied by empirical demonstration using a sample of the proposed material, including SEM/XEDS and DSC analyses."

...repeating a
paraphrased version of Dr. Jones´s
public 2009 challenge to "debunkers": "We cannot seriously
consider the paint hypothesis until someone performs these
seemingly easy tests and publishes the results" - and still we
wait.

Ziggi Zugam is Really, Really Upset with Dave Thomas!
While it's entirely possible that some of my initial statements regarding formation of iron-rich microspheres with thermite
may need to be revisited, I still contend that the presence of such spheres in WTC dust in no way confirms "thermite."Please check out these vigorous rebuttals by Ziggi Zugam - if anyone is really bothered by his accusations, drop me a line.While the DSC of thermite I cited is indeed hotter (at over 800 deg.
C) than some reported formulations of nano-thermite (over 500 deg. C),
it is useful to remember that the supposed "ignition temperature" in
Harrit et. al.'s DSC readings were much less than the "nanothermite" scans!Meanwhile, let's not forget about the elephant in the room - the Millette study showed NEGLIGIBLE ALUMINUM! And that means
NO Thermite!!

Dave Thomas´s most important discovery is that the iron-rich spheres discovered in the WTC dust are indeed rich in iron, not iron-oxide, and that the same is true for the spheres that Dr. Harrit´s red/gray chips form when ignited at only 430C. Mr. Thomas has also realized that previous efforts to debunk this evidence have been invalid, even though he still believes this issue has not been conclusively resolved.

Regarding Mr. Thomas´s comments:

1. The formation of spheres rich in elemental iron confirm Dr. Harrit´s "active thermitic material" hypothesis, so if you want to debunk the paper you have to address and refute this evidence.

2. The fact that the "red/gray chips" form the iron-rich spheres observed in the dust means they are one confirmed source for those spheres.

3. The low 430C ignition temperature of the chips has never been a valid refutation against the nano-thermite hypothesis. The ability to tailor the characteristics of "super-thermite" materials via the manipulation of the mixture, morphology, and the sizes of the ingredients was made clear by the cited references in the Harrit et al. report. I recently posted an article about a paper on a nano-thermite that ignites at 410C in air: http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-2004-paper-reveals-nanothermite.html

4. The Millette study has been criticized by us and even some of Harrit´s co-authors, as I and Talboo summed up in our fundraising essay for Mark Basile, so how about informing NMSR readers about some of those points? We have questioned whether or not Dr. Millette actually studied the same chips, and that alone puts those claims about "negligible aluminum" in doubt. The main evidence presented by the NMSR website is Millette´s FTIR, but EVEN IF Millette is right about lack of aluminum in the chips HE STUDIED, why does his FTIR data not match Kevin Ryan´s FTIR data for Harrit´s chips? Is this consistent with both parties studying the same material?

5. Millette´s report does not actually address or refute Dr. Harrit´s data revealing that the chips he studied do have aluminum - there is no response to figure 17. Is this why Dr. Millette refused to replicate the ignition tests and address the iron sphere evidence? Why do Harrit´s chips work if there is not enough aluminum?

Talking about elephants in the room: Why has Dr. Millette not yet published his study in a reviewed journal? And why is Dave Thomas "The Skeptic" still promoting a report that has remained unpublished for more than two years?

On
April 13, 2014, Michael Ruppert had just completed his final broadcast
of his weekly radio show The LIFE BOAT Hour, which he has helmed since
September 12, 2010. He went to an outdoor meditation spot on the
property at which he had been residing. When he was found, he had
apparently shot himself in the head with a Glock 30 .45 caliber pistol.
He was 63.

Mike Ruppert had become one of the most outspoken and
compelling voices in the realm of independent journalism and analysis.
He brought to the table a stupendous command of economic, historical and
political issues.

Ruppert represented a convergence of valuable
traits which included an academic's restless intellect, a cop's eye for
detail, a heart-felt passion for justice, and the street-level
experience of a whistleblower who broke ranks with the people he trusted
in the name of an all too uncommon ethical code that he lived by.

He
was able to bring to the table the critical arguments challenging
official government narratives about the global economy, the 9/11
attacks, the fratricidal death of Pat Tillman, CIA drug dealing in Black
communities throughout the US, peak oil as a causative factor
underlying US foreign policy, and many, many other stories.

This week, the Global Research News Hour pays tribute to Mr. Ruppert on the occasion of his recent tragic death.

The
podcast contains audio from past speeches and a previously recorded
conversation with him, as well as post-mortem conversations with five
individuals who knew and worked with Mike Ruppert over the years.

Carolyn
Baker is a long-time acquaintance of Mike Ruppert's. She was an adjunct
professor of history and psychology for 11 years and a psychotherapist
in private practice for 17 years. She authored several books related to
the concept of societal collapse. She contributed to Ruppert's on-line
newsletter From The Wilderness, and co-hosted his final radio broadcast
before he died.

Kellia Ramares-Watson is an Oakland-based
independent journalist and broadcaster. She was Bonnie Faulkner's
co-host on the very first broadcast of Guns and Butter for radio station
KPFA back on October 12, 2001. This debut episode featured none other
than Mike Ruppert with his initial impressions of the 9/11 attacks and
the US role in failing to prevent the attacks. The transcript of that
interview is available on the Global Research website.

Wesley
Miller was Mike Ruppert's attorney, executor and personal friend. He
replaced Ruppert as CEO and President of COLLAPSENET, the on-line
community portal for individuals and communities seeking to transition
away from a dependence on fossil fuels and industrial civilization.

Barrie
Zwicker is a long-time independent journalist and media critic. He
became one of the first people in the world to publicly critique the
official story of 9/11 on a national television broadcast. Barrie was
largely for getting RUppert's analysis of 9/11 aired on Canadian
television and paid tribute to him in his 2006 book Towers of Deception:
The Media Cover-up of 9/11.

Guy McPherson is Professor Emeritus
of Natural Resources and Ecology & Evolutionary Biology at the
University of Arizona. He has appeared on Ruppert's radio show a number
of times pioneering his research pointing to the prospects for the Near
Term Extinction of the human species due to climate change.

Ruppert's work has appeared often over the years on the Global Research website.

The
Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM in
Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

The show can be heard on the Progressive Radio Network at prn.fm. Listen in every Monday at 3pm ET.

The show also airs on CHLY 101.7 FM every Thursday at 1pm PT.

It airs on Boston College Radio WZBC 90.3FM NEWTONS Sundays at 7am ET during the Truth and Justice Radio Programming slot.

Port Perry Radio in Port Perry, Ontario -- Thursdays at 1pm ET

Burnaby
Radio Station CJSF out of Simon Fraser University. 90.1FM to most of
Greater Vancouver, from Langley to Point Grey and from the North Shore
to the US Border.

It is also available on 93.9 FM cable in the
communities of SFU, Burnaby, New Westminister, Coquitlam, Port
Coquitlam, Port Moody, Surrey and Delta, in British Columbia Canada. --
Tune in every Saturday at 6am.

On the 11th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, Richard discusses in detail some of the unanswered questions that remain about what happened that day, and the ongoing consequences, with reference to:- Mainstream reportage and thinking- Military action and expenditure- The USA: Basic rights of the society- Questions of James Corbett- Article by Paul Craig Roberts- The improbable failure that is purported by the official story- Foreign perspectives- Architects and Engineers for 911 truth

______________________________________

Dolan is the leading scholar in the field of UFO investigation. The man is highly rational and well researched. This is a great clip. Listen first before making any assumptions.

Regardless of his background, Dolan makes a lot of great points through referencing the arguments of people like James Corbett, Paul Craig Roberts plus the group Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth.

Dolan's main point is that we are going through completely unnecessary wars thanks to 911 and the truth will stop this.

Answer tracked down for you by the good folks at
http://debunkerbusters.blogspot.com
"How could such a conspiracy have been successfully carried out by the
notoriously incompetent officials of the Bush administration?
Cultivating chaos is a time-honored method of advancing anti-democratic
agendas, as described by Naomi Klein in The Shock Doctrine. 2 The
invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan have been extremely
lucrative for Bush administration cabinet officials, many of whom have
strong ties to the oil and weapons industries. 3 Average profits for
the Big Five oil companies doubled from 2000 to 2007, and awards to the
top ten Pentagon contractors increased 75% between 2001 and 2003. 4 5
In carrying out its Constitutional responsibilities to the people, the
Bush administration was indeed utterly incompetent. In enriching its
insiders and their cronies and evading criminal accountability for its
acts it couldn't have been more competent."
Source:
http://911research.wtc7.net/faq/conspiracy.html#competence

JohnMichael Talboo and Stewart Bradley
are interviewed by Visibility 9-11 with Michael Wolsey the
longest-running podcast for 9-11 Truth. A favorite on iTunes, this
podcast focuses on exposing the fraud of September 11th, 2001.